Could sitting around doing nothing really be as bad for us as smoking?

Keeping active is good for our health, but is a bout of inactivity as bad for us as smoking? Metro investigates.

Exercising helps us live longer (Picture: Getty)

Sitting on a couch and doing nothing is obviously bad for us, but just how bad?

Could inactivity be as harmful to our well-being as something such as a packet of cigarettes?

A recent report in the US claims being inactive is as dangerous to our health as smoking. The author, Harvard’s Dr I-Min Lee, said her study, published in medical journal The Lancet, shows that inactivity now causes as many deaths as smoking and that those living in Britain are among those most at risk, as nearly two-thirds of adults don’t take part in enough activity.

A lack of activity can lead to a wide range of medical problems – including heart disease, strokes and type 2 diabetes – and also increases the risks of developing some types of cancer, as well as osteoporosis and mental health problems.

In Britain, only 40 per cent of men and 28 per cent of women meet the minimum recommendations for physical activity in adults.

This inactivity doesn’t just put a strain on our health either: in England, the cost of this inactivity is estimated to be around £8.2bn a year. This is made up of the cost of treatment for lifestyle-related illnesses along with indirect costs caused by sick leave.

But while the comparison between the risks of inactivity and the risks of smoking might not be wide of the mark, it’s important to bear in mind that a significantly greater amount of research has been done into the effects of smoking.

‘The number of deaths which can be attributed to sedentary behaviour and smoking is fairly close,’ said Professor Tiago Barreira, from the Louisiana State University’s Biomedical Research Centre.

‘However, the impact of smoking has been extensively studied while the impact of sedentary behaviour is somewhat new, so we need to be careful in the interpretation of the data from sedentary behaviour studies.’

This isn’t the only aspect of the study which has attracted criticism, and Dr Lee admits that comparisons between countries were difficult because the way activity is estimated differs from country to country.

To complicate things, someone living in Britain might well be doing their recommended amount of exercise (2.5 hours a week for adults, one hour a day for children over 5), but if the remainder of the time is spent watching TV then they’re unlikely to be leading a healthy lifestyle.

‘We need to partially uncouple how much time we spend sitting in front of TV and how much time we are physically active,’ said Professor Stuart Biddle at Loughborough University’s School of Sport, Exercise & Health Sciences.

‘While sedentary and active time will compete to a certain extent, I could easily meet recommended guidelines for physical activity and still sit for too long in front of a screen.’

So why have we become such an inactive nation? Dr Lee believes the weather is partly responsible for the levels of inactivity within Britain. But is that really a valid reason? Some of the American states with the highest obesity levels and lowest activity levels are also those with most sunlight per annum.

‘There are other countries which also have bad weather but which show different – sometimes better – rates of activity,’ said Prof Biddle.

‘For example, there’s more cycling in the Netherlands and Denmark and more overall physical activity in Finland.’

Some point to the fact that children are spending less time exercising in school, while others claim that there should be more of a focus on teaching them exactly why exercise and a healthy diet are so important.

But in reality, a child washing down a takeaway pizza with a super-sized soft drink while sitting in front of the television is unlikely to believe such a lifestyle is healthy.

Indeed, many feel that those who point the finger of blame at schools and teachers should take a closer look at their own lifestyles.

‘I personally would argue that better education is unlikely to solve the obesity issue and get people moving,’ said Dr Stephen Ball, an expert in nutrition and exercise physiology at the University of Missouri. ‘Go ask any eight-year-old if exercise is good for their health and they will always answer yes. We’ve been told since we were very little that exercise is good for us yet it has done little to encourage the masses to move more. Parents shouldn’t rely only on schools. It’s critical that we provide youth with multiple opportunities to be active.’

And with video games, instant messaging and social media all becoming more popular, convincing people to get active is harder than ever before.Once a quick chat with a neighbour would mean a short walk, but now we can simply log on and send an instant message or talk face-to-face with applications such as Skype.

Fewer children play outside while video games have become more popular than ever before, not just with children but with adults too – in Britain, the average age of a ‘gamer’ is 28.

Some believe that the government simply hasn’t done enough. ‘The UK has not made serious efforts to promote and encourage physical activity for a long time,’ said Prof Fiona Bull, expert advisor to the World Health Organization and visiting professor at Loughborough University.

‘It was a world leader in 1997/98 with the Health Education Authority’s leading initiative. But for the last decade we’ve had more reports and less action. The Chief Medical Officers in both England and Scotland are highly supportive of the need to address this issue and the respective health departments – and the entire government – need to take bold action.’

Jessica Harris, health information manager at Cancer Research UK, agrees. ‘Everyone has a role to play in helping people get more active, and it’s important that governments, health organisations and individuals all share responsibility and do what they can to help,’ she said.

‘Governments can help by developing environments that enable more people to be active – by making towns and cities easier to walk and cycle around, by ensuring there’s lots of green space for people to enjoy, and by carefully planning public transport and leisure facilities.’Inactivity v smokingAn inactive person will spend 37% more days in hospital than an active one, make 5.5% more GP visits, 13% more specialist services and 12% more nurse visits than an active personRegular exercisers are 20% to 50% less likely to be affected by serious and expensive illnesses, including stroke, cancer, heart disease, obesity and diabetesOnly 39% of men and 29% of women in Britain meet minimum physical activity recommendationsRegular exercise reduces the risk of stroke by 27%, colon cancer by 25%, breast cancer by 24%, Type 2 diabetes by 30% and hypertension by 50%People who are physically active reduce the risk of premature death by about 20% to 30%In 1974, 45% of adults smoked cigarettes. In 2009, 21% of adults smoked86% of lung cancer deaths in Britain are caused by tobacco smokingTobacco smoking is estimated to be responsible for more than a quarter of cancer deaths in Britain – about 43,000 deaths a yearTobacco smoke is estimated to have caused about 60,000 cases of cancer in Britain in 2010Sources: The Ramblers, NHS, World Health Organization, Exercise Is Medicine, Cancer Research UK